RFA Poaching: Swimming in Shark-Infested Waters

It’s now been nearly two weeks since the NHL’s free agency period has opened, and with all the fiscal irresponsibility transactions that have taken place, numerous hockey websites, blogs, and analysts are mulling over the best, worst, and most confusing moves made this off-season. But Friday’s top signing seems to trump all the others thus far when it comes to sheer shock-value: the San Jose Sharks’ offer sheet of $14 million over 4 years to Chicago Blackhawks’ defenseman Niklas Hjalmarsson. Since he is a restricted free agent, the Blackhawks have seven days to match San Jose’s offer sheet to retain Hjalmarsson’s services, or lose the 23-year blueliner to the Sharks and receive compensation in the form of the Sharks' 1st and 3rd round draft picks next year.  (For a frame of reference on just how much a team gets compensated for an unmatched RFA tender, click here).


Why the shock, you ask? For starters, Hjalmarsson may well be the eighth player from the ‘Hawks Stanley Cup winning squad from last month to leave the Windy City via trade or free agency. Short of the Florida Marlins circa 1997, I’m not sure if I’ve seen a championship team in ANY sport dismantled so quickly. OK, I’m being a bit rash, but with the number of secondary scorers and role players Chicago has parted ways with so far this summer (Byfuglien, Eager, Sopel, Fraser, Ladd, Versteeg, and Burish, for those counting at home), one can’t help but be curious to see how the Hawks fare in defending the Stanley Cup victory in 2010-11, considering the sizeable makeover. And depending on how well Antti Niemi fares in salary arbitration, more moves could well be on the way (are your bags packed yet, Patrick Sharp?).

But I suppose I’m surprised more because in this salary cap era of financial management – where several teams are pressed against the cap ceiling due to poor managerial foresight, overspending for mid-level players, constant speculation the cap may decrease, etc. – that more NHL front offices HAVEN’T taken advantage of teams in the same monetary quandary Chicago finds itself in by tendering an offer sheet to the numerous RFA’s on the market.

Since the NHLPA ratified the current CBA (and thus ending the darkest days in NHL history), a grand total of FIVE offer sheets have been tendered to RFA’s throughout the league in that time (Ryan Kesler by Philadelphia in 2007, Thomas Vanek and Dustin Penner by Edmonton in 2007, David Backes by Vancouver in 2008, Steve Bernier by St. Louis in 2008) before Hjalmarsson’s signing Friday. All but one contract – Penner’s deal with the Oilers – was matched by the parent club of the prospective RFA. Oilers’ GM Kevin Lowe’s RFA poaching attempts of Penner and Vanek three summers ago drew a stern league-wide rebuke, and birthed a classic feud between himself and both Sabres GM Darcy Regier and then-Ducks GM Brian Burke.

Even before the lockout, it’s not as if teams were in the habit of offering deals to other RFA’s across the league. The last offer sheet tendered to an RFA of an opposing team? Try going back to 1999 and the legendary Brett Hauer, who last played in North America in 2002.

While most of the hockey headlines continue to fixate on the potential whereabouts for Ilya Kovalchuk for 2010-11 (or something about nuptials exchanged this past weekend), little text seems to be devoted to the numerous RFA’s still on the open market (though Puck Daddy had a nice piece earlier last week on this very topic).

Given the (mostly) lackluster crop of UFA’s this summer, one could easily argue that the RFA crop is much stronger (still available as of this writing: Bobby Ryan, James Neal, Marc Staal, Ian White, Carey Price, Devin Setoguchi, Blake Wheeler, amongst others). It’s safe to say NHL Free Agency 2010 has mostly disappointed until Friday. Perhaps the work by Dougie Wilson in San Jose could trigger a shift in philosophy for teams looking to fill the holes in their rosters for next season – and spark some animosity and hostility between other teams (like Chicago) in economic dire straits….nothing like a little hatred towards a fellow conference rival.

Maybe it’s the worst-case-scenario mentality that scares off NHL GM’s from courting RFA’s, knowing the cost of compensation could be quite steep (just think back to the Scott Stevens/Brendan Shanahan fiasco in the early 90's). Perhaps most GM’s seem to think they can do better for themselves by trading for an RFA’s rights rather than actually offering a contract (Phil Kessel last summer and Jaroslav Halak this summer come to mind). Perhaps it’s the harsh scorn and ridicule Lowe received following his pursuit of Vanek and Penner in the summer of 2007 that scares off any notion of scoring an RFA. Or it could be that these GM’s simply don’t want to take that chance, knowing either the parent team will match the offer, or that GM’s are clutching too tightly to those precious draft picks as if they were family heirlooms.

Whatever the reasons may be, I’m one hockey fan that’s hoping Doug Wilson’s actions might spice up the free agency world this summer.

Heatley to San Jose? Not if recent history has a say

One of the stories that has dominated the hockey landscape this summer has been the Dany Heatley saga. Not long after a disappointing season last year (both for “The Heater” and the Sens), the story broke that Heatley wanted out of Ottawa.  (Hmmm, where have we heard this one before?)  A week and a half ago, Heatley reinforced his stance after staying silent this summer by clarifying to the media that “over the last two years and more recently over the past year, I feel my role was diminished. This past season, it diminished a lot more.”  The story has sparked plenty of headlines this offseason, from interest to outrage.  Apparently, Dany has decided he and current Sens coach Cory Clouston don’t and won’t see eye-to-eye on Heatley’s ice time (which was reduced after Clouston replaced Craig Hartsburg as head coach, and strangely coincided with improved play from the Senators). A potential trade to Edmonton went POOF! when Heatley vetoed the move to northern Alberta (ah, the joy of the no-trade clause), and Sens GM Bryan Murray has been unable to find another suitor with enough cap room or one willing enough to meet Ottawa’s asking price (and we certainly know one place Dany-boy isn’t going to).  Edmonton has since retracted their offer, and now the L.A. Kings have pulled their name from prospective destinations for the two-time 50-goal scorer.

Meanwhile, out on the West Coast, another headline seemed to coincide nicely with Heatley’s reiterations. Recent rumblings of discontent rippled through the wire this past week when San Jose coach Todd McLellan stated to the press that the Sharks’ captaincy (as well as the assistant captaincies) will be up for grabs this training camp.  In short, Patrick Marleau no longer wears the “C” by the bay, this following an MVP caliber season. For now, anyway. Perhaps this could be a way for McLellan to shake things up for these perennial under-achievers, or there may well be a rift of some sort between coach and captain. The true answers will have to wait for what the future unfolds, but for now all that can be done is to speculate. And much speculation has indeed taken place.

Predictably, these two seemingly separate stories have somehow become inter-twined, as the rumor mill has been working overtime to perpetuate countless Heatley-for-Marleau trade rumors. Now, by this point, you can see where I’m going with this. “He’s about to propose a trade between the Sharks and Senators sending Heatley to the Bay and Marleau to the Canadian capital”, you say. “Could he be any more obvious?”

I will admit, I wouldn’t mind seeing a Marleau-for-Heatley deal happen. With the recent deal sending Christian Erhoff and Brad Lukowich from San Jose to Vancouver for prospects Patrick White and Daniel Rahimi (freeing up nearly $5 million in cap room for the Sharks), the buzz has intensified. But a straight-up for these two A-listers will require more maneuvering. Swapping Heatley’s bloated contract ($7.5 million) for Marleau’s ($6.3 million, in his final year of his current deal) saves Ottawa only $1.2 million. With the Sens currently $2.8 million OVER the salary cap (at least according to the most recent numbers I can find), additional purging must be done by Ottawa. Additionally, at a glance it appears San Jose will need to sign a few more players for depth for 2009-10 following the departures of Mike Grier and Marcel Goc, the retirements of Jeremy Roenick and Claude Lemieux, and the non-tendering of RFA Lukas Kaspar.

But all of this forecasting and prognostication leads me to this question: What ever happened to the big "one-star-for-another-star” trade?


One of the things I was expecting to see in the salary cap era was a little more creativity in the trading department. But the general managers of the NHL’s 30 teams have greatly disappointed me in this department. The majority of deals seen these days are salary dumps or out of desperation at the trade deadline. Sure, in several cases they fit a glaring need for at least one team involved, but the economics of the present-day game take into account getting “more bang for your buck” even more than ever. I’d think trading one proven star for another would be a wiser investment than dealing for middling players and prospects with promise and potential, but every scenario is weighed differently. Plus, most GM’s don’t seem to be willing to part with “sure things” in order to make the missing piece of the proverbial puzzle fit. And let’s face it, bloated contracts of under-achieving (or in this case, disgruntled) players are scrutinized even more than ever.

The vast majority of the trades in the salary cap era involving A-list superstars have involved sending mid-level NHLers, prospects, and draft picks in the other direction. It’s only fitting that Heatley was involved in the last true superstar-for-superstar swap when the Sens sent Marian Hossa (along with Greg de Vries) to Atlanta to get Heatley prior to the start of 2005-06.

Perhaps it’s just me, but the Joe Thornton-from-Boston-to-San Jose deal nearly four years ago, or the Hossa trade from Atlanta to Pittsburgh at the trade deadline two seasons ago just don’t have the same amazement factor to it, since an elite level player didn’t go in the other direction. I know GM’s today are always factoring in the maximum value they can get for a superstar, and Bryan Murray is undoubtedly taking this approach. But I can’t help but feel the longer Heatley stays in Ottawa, the greater the animosity will build in the Sens’ lockerroom. That kind of caustic environment in the clubhouse typically ends in a disasterous result on the ice, essentially ending the Sens’ season before it starts. Seems unwise to me to keep a malcontent player around, but I’ve been wrong about these things before. I can only see him giving his best effort night-in and night-out in an Ottawa sweater for the sole purpose of padding his trade value and marketability, enabling a quick getaway from the city he once rejoiced.

I guess I’m not necessarily advocating for a Heatley-for-Marleau trade. I could outline a number of reasons either for or against the deal. However, I really don’t care what the Senators choose to do with their disgruntled sniper. But I know I’ll continue to hear about it regardless of how this situation turns out. I’d simply like to see one of these ridiculous trade rumors come true. Brian Lawton aside (simply based on his inexperience), the days of the maverick wheeling-and-dealing GM seem to be dead. It’s disappointing to see the end of the era of the big trade. These re-runs of “Deal or No Deal” are a huge let-down, since we already know how they will end.